razorpay-mcp

list_subscriptions

Retrieve subscriptions with filters by date range and status. Specify from, to, status, count, and skip parameters.

Instructions

List subscriptions with optional filters

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "from": "<from>",
      "to": "<to>",
      "status": "<status>"
    },
    "name": "list_subscriptions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`from`	Yes	Unix timestamp — start date
`to`	Yes	Unix timestamp — end date
`count`	No	Number of records (max 100)
`skip`	No	Number of records to skip
`status`	Yes	Filter by subscription status

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0May 25, 2026

TDQS

C2.8/5.0

Behavior2/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states the basic operation, omitting details on pagination (e.g., max 100 records from schema), sorting, rate limits, or that it is a read-only operation. The agent lacks critical usage constraints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks detail. While no words are wasted, the brevity comes at the cost of missing crucial usage and behavioral information, making it less helpful.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the complexity (5 parameters with 3 required) and lack of output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain pagination defaults, return format, or how filtering works. The tool's context is not fully addressed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the schema already explains parameters. The description adds minimal value with the phrase 'optional filters', but does not elaborate on parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action (list) and resource (subscriptions), and mentions optional filters, which aligns with the input schema. However, it does not differentiate from sibling list tools (e.g., list_customers) beyond the resource name, and the phrase 'optional filters' is vague.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_subscription for a single entity or other list tools. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusion criteria.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server